Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by mongey, Mar 2, 2016.
Sorry to report this, but ignorant stuff like this is pretty standard these days. People who want their small pizza cut into four slices instead of six because they can't eat six slices, people who order a steak and ask for it to be made vegetarian, or people who order a steak and ask for it to be extra well done because their doctor told them not to eat red meat, etc. I worked in restaurants before, so I saw half of the stupidity that's out there and there is a lot of it about food.
I absolutely hear where you're coming from here and am in full agreement. But, to add context, we're referring to people that lack he life skills necessary to afford to feed themselves on their own, you know? I think our culture understandings of people prone to damaging life choices is severely limited; just like we would've put 'retarded' people away in insane asylums 50 years ago, I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding of what MAKES the type of people who insist on living miserable lives with no money (btw, I don't consider it 'insisting' in the sense that it's a conscious, informed choice) and we're going to continue to have these problems until society evolves into understanding that a different way.
That said, if we're discussing long term fixes to safety net programs (which encompass ALL parts of 'well being', food, healthcare, housing) and "major fixes", simply restricting what people are allowed to eat by force is INCREDIBLY short-sighted. To my point, if the goal is promoting healthier lives and lifestyles, to ultimately get people OFF of these programs and being healthy, contributing members of society, I think you make much more progress in education than through anything I've seen Trump et all propose. I also don't think villanizing people who partake in social welfare programs and lead shitty lives is at all proactive.
But that's thier goal isn't it? For the not quite poor to feel victimized by the poor?
"I would be a millionaire if all my taxes weren't going to the poors."
It's not the corporate welfare, out of control defense spending, or the rich rigging our government, it's those damn poors.
Not that I'm the biggest fan of the guy but reminded me of
1) I completely agree with that, but that only pertains to the people in the system who are using it legitimately. Unfortunately, I spent 18 years witnessing the total opposite of that. I lived with and was surrounded by the bottom feeders who find ways to milk the system for everything they can get. This is not limited experience with a few, this was 18 years with what I have to believe is the majority. I still see it today with a ridiculous amount of my co-workers.
My mother and stepfather got legally divorced because they were going to cut the amount of my mother's SSI checks. They were living comfortably enough, enough to pay to play Farmville on FB. Enough for a car less than 5 years old every 3-4 years. Enough to buy beer and cigarettes. Enough to get a credit card with a $5K limit. But she threw a fit when the state told her she was getting a paycut. So they got divorced and it was back to making it look like my stepdad wasn't living with her when the state would do their visits.
Keep in mind, she's never even paid into the social security system.
But they are far from the exception and quite closer to the rule. At least in Lewiston, ME. We used to hide our friend's stuff in our house when they'd get the yearly inspections or they were having maintenance stuff. As long as the state can't prove you have a source of income, you'll keep getting your checks. So when my parent's friends would get their yearly housing inspection, they'd bring all the boyfriend/husband's stuff to our house and vice versa to make it seem as if there were no man of the house. Thus, you get your bar, beer, cigarette, weed, whatever money.
2) I think everyone should take one year of their life, right after high school, to work with the general public. You'd be amazed what you can learn about people, society and how much of it you wish you never knew.
I couldn't agree more. Education is key and I think it needs to be started early on. Growing up, the welfare system was never taught to us in school. It's amazing how much of our government systems are not taught on an education level in schools. I think a large reason why it was never discussed in my schools was because so may of the kids in the schools were in the system and they didn't want to shame us as a whole.
I can't fathom the insistence on staying in the system. Growing up a welfare kid sucked and it made me never want to rely on anything to keep me afloat. My sister has always held down 1 or 2 jobs at a time to ensure she wouldn't as well. The majority of the kids I knew who grew up in the system are still up there and repeating the process. I'm really drawing a blank when I think of a single person I speak to today who was in the system and got out when they grew up.
I think a part of it is that we're told not to be ashamed when we're younger by our parents. It's not that it was a sense of pride, but there was definitely a "We're poor and we don't give a shit, so fuck you!" feeling. There's a lot of victimizing going on in that culture and that plays a big part in the kids who pick up on that behavior and then use it later.
While I don't think everyone on the system should be villianized, I DO think they should be tougher on the ones caught abusing the system. The city put some low-income housing right in the middle-class suburbs of my hometown, so the school I ended up in for the last 3 years of elementary school was filled with mostly middle-class kids. That's when I found out I was poor and it wasn't that much fun. Each week the teacher would take lunch call, I'd have to tell them, "Free; hot all week." which meant I got free lunch and I wasn't bring a bagged lunch from home, but you'd have to yell it across the class, so everyone knew, and was reminded, that you were poor. That actually continued until high school. Talk about giving kids a bunch of ammo every Monday morning to bust your balls over!
I've heard various people over the years try to make points like, well, Hitler wasn't all bad because he was vegetarian.
Really, I'll take advice on policy from those who remain free of racist intentions. I don't even want to start looking for a few potential grains of good in a sea of feces.
Do you think it's better to start with a better source of broad public policy without racism, than to sift for some potential (not guaranteed) ideas from a racist? Why would the latter be the possibility you're attempting to defend with your unproven hypothetical?
What you describe, welfare abuse, is a drop in the ocean of corporate abuse and tax avoidance by the rich. A drop in the ocean. It's simply irrelevant financially, but is kept in the public eye as a distraction. It's the same here in England.
I agree that education, a great curriculum, accountable schools and staff, are the answer to pretty much every major problem. Unfortunately that's also very difficult to manage, especially as public education simply isn't given the tools or backing needed.
I've seen tax cuts where one specific cut on one specific company could cover over 25% of the entire SNAP budget for the state.
But this goes hand in hand with @vilk 's point. Keep the poor people bickering and groveling for their scraps while the rich are burning money, but just make sure the attention is on the poor, and the rich can get away with pretty much anything. Right now, this country is seriously testing the boundaries of that. Trump is tweeting so much inflammatory stuff and we see what crazy pills people will swallow.
I'm sorry for nitpicking but those two things aren't really the same so as that they might be logically compared.
[person] -- [negative personality trait] -- [positive reality]
^Trump -- racist -- good legislation
[person] -- [positive personality trait] -- [negative reality]
^Hitler -- vegetarian -- holocaust
I'm not really sure which logic fallacy it is though. Or if it technically is related to logic. But do you see what I'm saying? It's related to what Randy and I were saying about action>intention, which I think that most people agree with. I don't really have anything to add I just wanted to point it out... sorry
You mean the following statement is logically inconsistent with itself?
[person] -- [overt personality trait] -- [opposite reality]
Because it's equally applicable to both situations, and is just one statement, it's hard for me to picture it as unequal to itself. It is a mere inversion of the "reality" part to be opposite of personality.
A similar restatement of what you view as self-contradictory, in more English-like language, would be
[person] has [particular intentions] yet creates [opposite outcome]
No need to be sorry for wanting clarification. In fact, if you manage to figure out how either of my two formulations are automatically self-contradictory, I'll be interested in hearing about it, as I actually had quite a few years dealing with formal statements, truth tables and Boolean logic. I'm always happy to learn something new.
But the holocaust isn't an opposite of vegetarianism and Hitler did it intentionally? lol I feel so dumb
Well, if [person] is willing to [create suffering] but instead [avoids creating suffering], then in that aspect the Holocaust is the opposite of vegetarianism. Why? Do you think of them as being the same in that aspect?
I don't even necessarily consider vegetarianism to be innately "good"... meat consumption doesn't definitely have to involve suffering. Even though I'm sure it usually does for most Western meat production facilities.
Hitler being a vegetarian, yet being responsible for the holocaust is not the converse of Trump being racist yet being responsible for legislation that curbs racism, because we do not generally equate a dietary restriction with genocide, yet racism is equivalent to racism.
Also, as an aside, the anecdote that Hitler was vegetarian is actually very interesting, if you look into it. Hitler claimed to be a strict vegetarian, yet we have accounts from several of his chefs that he enjoyed sausages, sliced ham, stuffed squab, etc., none of which a strict vegetarian would eat. So, I think it looks like it'd be more accurate to describe Hitler as the kind of person who would go to a restaurant and order a veggie burger with bacon on it.
And back on topic, Trump is not a legislator anyway, he's the chief executive, so if he's racist, it won't show in our laws, it'll show in how our laws are enforced, and that should be a more frightening proposition. Yes, the president has veto powers over legislation, but you can't really veto racism into a bill, you'd need racist and anti-racist bills to selective veto and not veto in order to impose racism on legislation during your term as president.
1) But that's not what I was talking about at all. I was saying that cooking from scratch takes longer than feeding yourself with prepared food, so I have no idea what that has to do with welfare system abuse.
2) I worked retail in college and for maybe 6 months afterwards before moving into finance. I've seen plenty of entitlement and some stupidity, and I've still never met anyone who isn't just a kid who legitimately doesn't know where pork comes from.
I used to wonder if people on Yahoo Answers were just trolling, but after shit like this becoming commonplace, you have to admit some of these people are serious.
Anyway, ... Trump ...
Three strikes yet?
Last go around, I believe SCOTUS said they'll hear the case if it makes it back to them again. Even with a conservative leaning court, I'm not necessarily expecting they'll uphold the travel ban but I believe there's a desire to see this resolved in legislation rather than an executive action. I'm not entirely sure how you'd write up that decision but yeah, ultimately I'm not expecting them to give Trump 100% of what he wants or to reverse the ban completely either.
Within days of my pointing out that Trump stopped monitoring of white supremacist terrorist groups, it turns out the latest school shooter...
...whom Trump called mentally ill, had trained with such a white supremacist militia, and had posted anti-muslim content.
Is it surprising that those affected in Florida think Trump's statement was just empty words?
No, not in the slightest. He also gutted an Obama era bill that would ban those receiving social security for mental illness from buying guns.
I think the thing that pisses me off the most though is that everytime this happens the right screams, "don't politicize this!". But as soon as an immigrant or Muslim does anything it's, "kick them out of the country! They're all bad!"
It also irks me that Columbine was a national tragedy that stopped the country for a day, but shit like this happens now and we're desensitized.
It also terrifies me that people are spreading Infowar's posts that wrongly identify being the shooter as a way to further their violent leftist rhetoric.
We are all so completely fucked.